Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.

You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.

Usual google stuff, make big money from profiling--->adsense. Take over companies and code, beautify it, promote as innovation.

I am a happy k-meleon user. I personally have no interest in any new google product. Because this new browser from google will be one more nail in the coffin of your privacy.

Competition is good that is for sure but everytiem google come up with something people just drool all over as if like they come up with something from out of space. If you look around you will find tens of alternatives to every google product and some of them are way better than google`s product line.

At the moment I am helping wikia`s web crawler. I am hoping that they will be able to provide some decent search soon. Help them grow!

Naturally in the beginning a search engine like wikia and grub are very marginal and only marginal section of the society is interested in it. As the name wikia implies it is based on wikipedia idea. Founder of wikipedia is part of the process. The idea is that a search engine and its terms should be open and public which I believe with my whole heart. Commercialised proprietary search engine is not good for future of man kind.

Look at wikipedia, it was a crazy idea in the beginning. Now it is so streamlined and developed that you can even cite for your science or literature research. Can you imagine a web space without Apache-php? Think about Linux and what it is providing. These are all based on simple beliefs and hard work. Same thing can and should happen in internet search engines arena.

Wow, anyone citing wikipedia is immediately told off in no uncertain terms where I go to school. Its useful for background information and to suggest a way to go perhaps but it is not considered a reputable scholarly work, at least here.

Grorgy,I did not mean that you can write a whole scholarly paper based on wikipedia. I was just trying to circle an idea there. I am not praising wikipedia as a sole holy information source. It is rather a good place to check some quick facts. And it sure helps people stay informed in certain topics. it is helpful.

I believe Google has its own agenda, which might not be in the best interest of users (at least the privacy-conscious ones). But as long as it sticks to its promise in keeping Google Chrome open source, I don't think there's too much to worry about, because:

1. extensions in the line of Noscript and Adblock Plus should spring up soon enough when needed.

2. Firefox (and extensions) developers could return the favor and take whatever useful from Google Chrome.

Anyway, it's coming and we can't stop it. Let's just wait and see how it goes.

I agree wholeheartedly with most of the concerns expressed here in this thread, though I can't understand what all the fuss is about. Google is simply being opportunistic, and only those ignorant enough not to see it will be affected. You may try and try again to reach these people, but they are the same type of person who uses stock standard IE...they simply don't care.As mwang has suggested, none of us will miss out on features; Google stole features from every other browser on the market, and the Firefox development community will respond in kind. IMO this browser is nothing for most of us to worry about, except to concern ourselves with the plight of those willing to use this browser, and the damage its use may cause to Net Neutrality.

in their 'introductory' comic book, Google do mention their browser is based on open-source Webkit (the same engine used by Safari) and they freely borrowed from other browsers. they also commended their team in Denmark for building a JavaScript Virtual Machine within the browser.

i wonder if they got tired of all their ads being blocked that they had to release their own browser. but i'm still waiting for the official release.

I doubt it'll become my primary web browser . . . I don't expect it to have the graceful customization and keyboard friendliness of Opera, it won't be a true MDI and, too, will lack Firefox's redeeming quality--extension support. Unless it happens to be extremely fast and extremely light weight with passable keyboard support, it'll just be a novelty download for me.

That said, being the opposite of Kartal in all things google, I am excited to take a peak at Chrome. I'm a bit disappointed they didn't ground-up write this, including the rendering engine, but I'm curious to see their results. And as aforementioned, if nothing else perhaps it *will* introduce some really innovative features over time to rejuvinate browser development accross the board.

Mozilla CEO John Lilly on Tuesday waxed philosophical about the release of Google's new Web browser, Chrome, despite it signaling an attempt by the search giant--and Mozilla's major financier--to become its biggest competitor...Mozilla and Google have had a long and very fruitful relationship. Google is the default search engine on the Mozilla Firefox browser, and the company pays Mozilla large sums for the privilege: $56 million of the $66 million that Mozilla Corp. made in 2006.

But Lilly, writing in his blog, said he welcomed the competition posed by Google. Lilly said Mozilla would continue its financial relationship with Google until 2011 and would continue to work with the search giant on technical collaborations such as crash reports system Breakpad.

Paul Kim, vice president of marketing for Mozilla, said that Google staff would be allowed to continue to contribute to the Mozilla Foundation's projects. "As a 100 percent open-source project, we welcome contributions to Firefox from everyone," he said.

I think it's quite possible what we are looking at here, from a business standpoint, is google covering its bases in the way that only a giant corporation with money to burn can. Recently we heard that google and mozilla agreed to continue for the time being their business arrangement where google massively funds firefox and firefox makes google the default search engine in the firefox browser.

It seems plausible that what google is doing with Chrome is basically saying to firefox: we have an alternative browser we can market and spend the money on. i.e. they are covering their bases -- their goal is to dominate the search space -- if that means buying their way into the top browser then they will do that, but what if firefox demands too much money or changes their mind and decides to use a different search engine as their default (they can't really change search engines even if they wanted to now because they need google money).

Chrome may be the shot across the bow from google warning firefox not to think about trying to mess with having google as the default search engine. So basically my guess is google won't push the new browser to hard as long as firefox stays in line.. But the threat will be that if firefox ever tries to stop partnering with google then google will go all out against firefox. If true it's not exactly happy news. Or maybe i am just being conspiratorial.

by the way -- does anyone know if there is a term in the field of commercial marketing where a company releases a product without the actual intention of spending much money marketing it -- but instead just to scare away or keep the competition in line, using the threat of large-scale marketing if a competitor tries to challenge them?

I think it more likely they're trying to pick up some of the market that isn't yet using a respectable browser. While that might be competition, in that Firefox too would like to snatch up these users, I see it not really undercutting them so much as presenting themselves as a more viable transition.

It has the advantage of being the property of a name, google, that is as well known as Microsoft--which by name familiarity alone may make for a less anxious transition than IE to Firefox. When trying to get someone to use Opera or Firefox from IE, I've often found resistence because they want to know what the hell a firefox is and why it has such a silly name--often assuming it's some weird flybynight thing and I've been duped. It's not as common now as it once was, but I still encounter this situation.

But tell them to switch to google's browser--I can see the conversation playing out already, with non-technical users who fumble with the Internet. "I use google all the time, they have a browser? That makes sense... can I import all my favorites? How do I get it?"

I doubt Chrome will be a viable alternative to Firefox or Opera for power users who have been using/tweaking configuration/extension combinations for years, have a work flow they are comfortable with . . . I can easily see chrome taking market share from Internet Explorer, but not so much firefox.